I was going to say that, despite my very limited experience with Japanese, I instinctively thought よだん, but I didn't know why. Then I read this and realized it was why.

I would be inclined to stick with よだん because what should count is the counter itself; the context it's being used in shouldn't make a difference. But, of course, "shouldn't" doesn't always mean "doesn't". I'm sure lots of languages out there have words that change pronunciation or inflection depending on context even when they're etymologically the same word. (It happens in English: "I slew the dragon", vs. "The comedian slayed me with his jokes")

I was going to say that, despite my very limited experience with Japanese, I instinctively thought よだん, but I didn't know why. Then I read this and realized it was why.

I would be inclined to stick with よだん because what should count is the counter itself; the context it's being used in shouldn't make a difference. But, of course, "shouldn't" doesn't always mean "doesn't". I'm sure lots of languages out there have words that change pronunciation or inflection depending on context even when they're etymologically the same word. (It happens in English: "I slew the dragon", vs. "The comedian slayed me with his jokes")

十分 = じゅうぶん, じっぷん, じゅっぷん.

Also it seems to me that 四 in these two 四段's are different ; in martial arts, it's an ordinal number whereas in grammar, it would rather be a cardinal one (or that's how I interpret it at least), so it wouldn't surprise me if there were different readings. Not to mention that these two words probably come from different periods (if I'm not mistaken, a lot of Japanese grammar terms come from the Meiji period and were coined by... this grammarian whose name I don't remember).

To be fair, じゅうぶん is different in meaning than the other two, though; 分 isn't really functioning as a counter. And, to be honest, I don't even know what the difference between the other two is. ^^;

kurisuto wrote:Also it seems to me that 四 in these two 四段's are different ; in martial arts, it's an ordinal number whereas in grammar, it would rather be a cardinal one (or that's how I interpret it at least)

I think calling it an ordinal number in the case of martial arts is more of a convention than anything. I know the usual way to say it in English is "fourth dan", but I don't think "four dan" would be wrong. Compare "5th grade" versus "grade 5" in English -- the latter isn't particularly common, but it exists, and uses a cardinal number despite meaning exactly the same thing.

furrykef wrote:And, to be honest, I don't even know what the difference between the other two is. ^^;

According to this, じっぷん is the most "correct" one (maybe it would be more appropriate to say "regular"), and じゅっぷん was formed by analogy with other compounds where the reading of the first kanji is じゅつ (and where gemination occurs). Now, as you probably know, じゅっぷん is more common.

I think calling it an ordinal number in the case of martial arts is more of a convention than anything. I know the usual way to say it in English is "fourth dan", but I don't think "four dan" would be wrong. Compare "5th grade" versus "grade 5" in English -- the latter isn't particularly common, but it exists, and uses a cardinal number despite meaning exactly the same thing.

I understand your point, but since "5" in "grade 5" doesn't represent a quantity and seems to have the function of an ordinal number, I think we should consider it an ordinal number. It wouldn't function as an ordinal if, say, "1st grade" were "grade 3", "2nd grade" were "grade 5" and "3rd grade", "grade 1" (i.e in this case it would only be the names of the different grades), but it happens not to be the case.

In fact, it makes me think of what was said in the thread about adjectives used as adverbs ; "sure" instead of "surely" and "grade 5" instead of "fifth grade" look rather similar... just my opinion !

And now, a little counter-argument : one could say that "5" in "grade 5" is only a name too, based on the actual order of the grades (and as such, matches the ordinal numbers that would otherwise be used). That would seem reasonable too.

But in any case, 四 in the two 四段's are different, I think -- which doesn't necessarily mean they should behave differently, of course ; the point is that it would be more likely. Anyways, as spin13 and NocturnalOcean have said, both よん and よ appear to be acceptable.

Mmm...If you put 四 before a normal counter, it should be よん.For instance, 4オングストローム should always be よん おんぐすとろーむ.

But as for 段, I accept both よだん and よんだん. I can't think of any reason but just by a custom or by my memory of how people say.

And I came across other examples of よ.A counter 列 (column) allows よ as well as よん, i.e. both よれつ and よんれつ work perfectly.(段 also means "row" if you ask me)

On the other hand, a counter 隅(角) allows only よ. 四隅(四角) is almost always pronounced as よすみ and never よんすみ. Probably 四隅(四角) is a popular idiom, or it's just a single word.And 三隅(三角) should be みすみ, ...I guess rarely be さんすみ but both are acceptable. 三隅(三角) is not a perfect single word or less popular idiom (than 四隅).Well, I think there are gray zones in some counters.Maybe elderly people would say only よすみ and みすみ are correct, though.

On the contrary, 四方 always be read as しほう, never よんぽう. In all directions, all around. It's a perfect single word.

Take a look at the quoted post. It's the general rule about when to use which pronunciation. よ is preferred when it's a ひと-counter, and you usually use よん for いち-counters. That's why 四隅 is よすみ; you're counting the number of すみ (隅), which is what the counter means as a stand-alone word. You say よさら (四皿) because さら is a stand-alone word that means the very thing you're counting while the more common pronunciation of 四台 is よんだい because you're not counting the number of stands. So usually よれつ is preferred for 四列, though よんれつ isn't wrong, especially when it sounds better because of rhythm, rhyme, etc.

As for 四段, it depends on what kind of thing you're talking about. If it's your level/rank of a traditional thing like shogi (将棋), it most likely follows the general rule, i.e., the pronunciation is よだん because you're counting だん (段). But it might be different in another field.

Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you criticize them, you are a mile away and you have their shoes.

Well, the notion of a "correct" reading can be pretty fuzzy in any case, just as correct usage in English can be fuzzy. Lately I've been poking through The Elements of Style, a famous book for how to tighten your (English-language) writing, and there's a whole chapter of "words and expressions commonly misused", many of which I don't feel are misuses at all. (I do still agree with most of them, though.) But then, the book goes back to 1918, and newer editions have been largely conservative in preserving Strunk's (and, later, White's) advice.

Similarly, often there is no authority on what is proper Japanese usage. As far as I know, Japan doesn't have an official language academy, and the Ministry of Education's advice on usage is exactly that: advice. Ultimately, the best you can do is just imitate the usage of educated speakers.